click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121201
20121231
SHOW
STATION
CSPAN2 48
LANGUAGE
English 48
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)
in new york and new jersey and other northeastern states who were hurt by sandy. we have had some pretty tough disasters in tennessee as well. we had a thousand-year flood a couple years ago -- not 100-year but a thousand year. we knew the federal government wasn't going to make us whole. we had billions of dollars of damage, 52 counties hurt, but we knew the federal government could help and it did and it did swiftly, and that's what we want to do in this case. with all the talk about the money we're about to appropriate, i think it's important to remind those who live in new york and new jersey and connecticut what's already being done with money we have already appropriated. for example, there are 5,460 fema personnel in those states. there are 507,000 citizens of those states who have already filed individual assistance applications. this is when your home's gone and you need money for rent or you need money to rebuild. those applications are in. already $1.09 billion has been paid to those individuals. there are 25 disaster recovery centers in new york, three in connecticut, $150 mi
to help the citizens of new york, new jersey, and other parts of the northeast as they recover from the damn of hurricane van dihurricane sandy. as we did before, we have an opportunity to help maim make families and communities whole again. i hope my colleagues will join in moving quickly to send aid to those affected by sandy as they continue to recover and rebuild. the senate must move swiftly to approve supplemental disaster aid and act to give the intelligence community the stools tools it needs to -- the tools it needs to keep our nation safe before the christmas holiday. before we leave for chris marks we'll have to finish our work on sandy and fisa. they're both extremely important, but they have to be completed. so everyone should understand we have that to do, and it appears at this stage we'll see if anything changes -- but it appears that we're going to be coming back the day after christmas to complete work on the fiscal cliff and a few other leftover items. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i want to start by extending my deepest sympathies to the families of the victims o
that? "the new york times" recently wrote that in florida, quote, as he ballot scandal seemed to arrive like clockwork. end of quote. i am pleased that two secretaries of state are with us today. i welcome i was secretary of state, matt schulz, state election officials are well-versed on the procedures that are needed to run their elections. conscientious state officials such as my secretary of state have sought to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls. federal officials did not assist them in ensuring that legal holes are not honored by the counting of votes from ineligible voters. in fact, the department fact the department of homeland security did all he could to prevent maintaining integrity of voting roll. we will hear that turnout rises when ballot integrity is fostered. states have a fair amount of discretion in how they choose to run elections. early voting has grown in popularity. but there's a cost even beyond the lack of a common civic engagement on election day. and i look forward to this hearing, and hope that we get an answer to these questions. but circumstances could c
appoint the honorable kirsten e. gillibrand, a senator from the state of new york, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. reid: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following leader remarks, the senate will be in a period of morning business for an hour. republicans will control the first half, the majority the second half. following morning business, we'll resume consideration of the supplemental appropriation bill. i mentioned last night, madam president, that we're going to have to move forward on this bill. i have been told that the republicans want to have a substitute, and we look forward to whatever that might be, that we can set up a series of votes to satisfy those people who want to change this bill in some manner. i would just note that the people in the northeast, other states but principally new york and new jersey, there are 700,000 people who have lost their homes and are still -- tens of thousands of those homes have been destroyed. other people are still living in very, very difficult sit
developer. and the same is true with proposed be developed of moynihan station in new york. so yes with respective stations, there is great opportunity to leverage private investment for the department of those stations to pay for the transportation function of those stations. >> and how about as far as phase one? the rail over the environmental process. >> what we will be doing in phase one is to evaluate what potential private investment might be. that is definitely part of the scope of work of phase one. so we will be studying that spent and how about phase two, what type of private investment are you looking for in phase to? >> well, we will find out in phase one what we come you, that's what phase one is to find out is to what the potential is for private investment, for private going forward. >> unlike in california, the northeast corridor service provides, my numbers to show 75% of rail air market. what's the proportion of passenger rail transfer, transport in the air rail market for california? >> i don't have those numbers, but i know there's been a study of what the impac
of urgency required by the times in which they were forged. recently, "the new york times" columnist david brooks sum a -- summarized this concept well when he wrote that there are policies that are not permanently right and that situations matter most. tax cuts might be right in one decade but wrong the next. title regulations might be right one decade but if sclerosis sets in, then deregulation might be in order. madam president, as we confront the impending confluence of issues known as the fiscal cliff, we are at a moment of major significance that requires the applications of the principle that brooks describes, and for the sake of the country, we must demonstrate to the american people that we are, in fact, capable of making the big decisions by putting in place an agreement and a framework to avoid the fiscal cliff before we adjourn this year. madam president, we are surrounded by history perpetually here in the senate as well as throughout the capitol. how could we not be inspired by it to rise to this occasion? indeed, if you know history, you understand the very story of america'
herkimer county new york. they are made in america.y are the only course that is a 7.5 on hard this scale. that is unique beade. it is the equivalent of a d- flawless nd because it does not get better than the sparkle and the clarity and the fire of a herkimer diamonds. this is one day and all the offer for less than $50. last night are ordering multiple we understand that because they are beautiful and easy to and it looked beautiful on everybody. all of the lovely host have been wearing this all week and they have gorgeous with everything.i love them. that are light. they are comfortable. they look great. they feel great. s is the earring that you will live in, if you give this as a gift she will love it. the model has a tiny earlobe and you can see it is not pulling on her delicate little year. they make an enormous impact in a subtle and classic and elegant way. this is if you are in your 20s your great-grandmother. i do not know many women that would not love this earring.our representatives is taking already that is exciting and unique. use express ordering. you cannot find her, a s
of the rebellion. one m23 spokesperson recently stated in "the new york times" we want more than decentralization. we want federalism. the eastern parts of the congress interests are in eastern africa. even senior ugandan security officials also acknowledged this was the aim of the rwandans in this m23 were. one officer who was himself involved in supporting m23 in cooperation with the rwandans told us they are thinking there. need to look at south sudan. this objective also explains why rwanda have consistently sought -- as one single united credible front against each other. and repeatedly calling the congo a big black void in the congolese state as fictitious. a federal autonomous state system would cement a guaranteed rwanda's already influence over military, political, economic and cultural aspects of life. the government of rwanda is given great credit since the -- to rebuild his country with unmatched progress. however that same determination has led rwanda's leaders to erroneously adopt its inherently destabilizing long-term geopolitical strategy for the eastern drc. so if rwanda's geopol
that according to "the new york times," and this is a quote in the spring of 1998, the ambassador sent an emotional whether to the secretary of state madeleine albright for the secretary's personal health. january 9th 1999 the times article said the had been fighting for months for more security in the embassy, more secure in the sea in the face of manning terrorist threats. secretary albright to "the new york times" reports took no action and months later on august 7th the american embassy in tanzania and kenya were simultaneously bombed by car bombs. he founded a number of diplomatic security staff on the day of the attack and in the months and the weeks leading up to it was the inadequate, despite the repeated requests through the special mission in benghazi and the embassy's for the additional staffing hanft. there was a pervasive realization that served in benghazi that wasn't a high priority. so my question, a couple questions, three of them, and the lead up to the top for president obama, vice president joe biden or secretary clinton aware of the repeated request for how upgrade
from new york. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be repealed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. first i want to thank my great colleague from pennsylvania, i enjoyed sharing a table last night with him and his beautiful, charming, intelligent wife, who he's lucky he would be the first to admit he's lucky to have married, and their four great girls. but second, thank him for his excellent, as usual, on-target remarks. we have a great chairman of the j.e.c. and every time he comes to the floor, it shows shoas. olympia snowe, bill kristol, congressman mike simpson of idaho, david brooks, congresswoman bono-mack and walter jones, "the national review." we're here to ai seau passing the senate's middle-class tax cut is the right thing to do. you don't have to take our word for it. two-thirds of the american public agrees with us but you don't need to take their word for it, either. just listen to the voices within speaker boehner's own party. there we go. a kent conrad i am not in terms of my facility with charts. it's clear
we would address it together. >> mr. cook do you have any incumbent new york city in different approaches is that cultural between the two regulatory bodies? >> i can't speak to the cftc statute but one of the reasons it drove us to the rulemaking in the context is that we look at the data, and in our market the security based market most transactions involve a party that isn't in the u.s.. so this is a cross border market. and how you do the cross border roles is how you do title seven. and so, we felt under those circumstances that when you are looking at the whole, it was important to take a holistic approach the cross border rules and because it was such a significant, had such a significant impact on how they were going to work that we needed to do a formal rulemaking. >> to mr. cook, thank you. i know i am out of time. i'm comfortable with what mr. cook is doing because of the data that you're going to collect. mr. gensler, it makes me a little nervous and particularly because of the different approaches. you know, and there are so many other questions i want to get to. b
and pennsylvania fellows and new york fellows were all good to me. >> like your colleague, daniel akaka and former transportation chairman norman, world war ii was important in the event in their lives and in your life as well. you serve in the most highly decorated unit in the history of the united states army and received a bronze star, distinguished service cross and middle of honor. can you tell us what you learned from that experience, and how did that experience impact your public career? >> well, there are certain things that haunt me even to this day. and that is the realization of that the war can change a person's character and personality. one might be content and say i'm a good person. now, for example one week before i got into the service and put on my uniform i was and sunday school teacher and i sang in acquire. my mother was a devout methodist , christian temperance movement. they don't get any more difficult than that. the whole family was that way. then after training and going overseas, i recalled telling the first german -- killing the first german. the thing that haunts me is
, puerto ricans in new york and chicago who are very liberal, but we're starting to see the rise of foreign-born latinos and their children who tend to be more conservative. i mean, just look at the pew numbers. on abortion still the majority believe that abortion should be legal compared to about 40% of the rest of the population. marriage, that is shifting. it has certainly shifted in the past five years, but there's still a good chunk of that electorate that is very conservative when it comes to, to marriage. the question is with social issues is not are you going to scare voters away. we believe that those who vote exclusively for those issues are going to vote, are mostly religious people who are going to vote for the candidate who has the traditional positions. nobody's not going to vote against the candidate because of their position of marriage within the latino community. >> right. it's scary to me because it is a place where we're not looking, again, we're not looking to the future. as a republican, we're counting on the older ones and not looking to how the vote is going to chang
the state of new york, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. mr. reid: madam president, following leader remarks the senate will be in a period of morning business until 2:00 today. the republicans will control the first 30 minutes and the majority the final 30 minutes. the time from 11:30 till 2:00 p.m. will be for remarks by retiring senators. following morning business we'll resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 3637, the tag extension legislation. the filing deadline for first-degree amendments to that legislation is 1:00 p.m. today. madam president, the headline news for the last many weeks has been the fiscal cliff. in speaking with the president six months before the election, a few weeks before the election, a few days before the election and immediately after the election, he indicated that we needed to get our financial house in order and that his goal was to do just that. but to do that, because of past experiences, he laid out what he wanted, and that's very simple. the rates for those who have been blessed with econo
are running a very important agency at a new york veryage dedicated to that task.ncy, an it's good that you here this morning to answer the committee's questions. 10 10 million m americans benefit from a system that has servede this this country for many decades very well. it's a system where pensions an other benefitswh are provided, where small businesspeople,ruckg contractors, trucking companies, markets, supermarkets and otherd get together and pooled theirshe resources and share costs in p order to provide pensions and eb other employee benefits. ehis is what's known as, theas h chairman said, as the multi-employer pension system. the multi-employer pension system in all cases and falls a collective bargaining agreement that sets the terms and conditions for the benefits that will b will be given. the system has worked extraordinarily well and it ise the system that 10 million americans rely upon for their pension. it is essentially and it fundamentally is sound, that the are some significant problemsles that we must deal with in order to assure it sound as. the grass better to my righ
this columnist for "the new york times" is brilliant in writing. he's a great, great journalist and explains things so well. i really have great admiration for him. he wrote yesterday, "republicans have to realize they are going to have to cave in on tax rates." that's the way it is, mr. president. "they're going to have to cave on tax rates." then on tuesday, day before yesterday, the senior senator from maine, olympia snowe, urged house republican leaders to end the suspense for middle-class taxpayers. "they shouldn't have to wonder whether we will ultimately raise taxes on low- to middle-income people." i assure them we won't raise taxes on the middle class on the poor, is what ow olympia snowe said. yesterday it seemed every practical republican left in washington was suddenly willing to say out loud what we have known for weeks: the only remaining option is for the house to pass the senate bill. dozens of house republicans signed onto a letter urging speaker boehner to take the last hexit before the cliff. neither president obama nor democrats in congress have ever been ambiguous about
of a disaster you have. at least disasters as described by existing law, and new york will get their money and it doesn't necessarily have to be the 64 million, it's just got to make sure there's money there for what's needed tomorrow and the next day and the next day. but we aren't going to have a final figure on this for a long time. so we ought to just move with some money to make sure it's there for what can be spent right now. i yield the floor. do you want me to suggest -- i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officer: the leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i rise today to honor a woman by the name of janice shelton. for her friendship, and 32 years of dedication as an employee of this body, the united states senate. 25 of those years janice worked as my executive assistant. she's demonstrated a sincere dedication to me, my office, my family, and this body, the united states
of history and literary life of new york's capital city, albany. saturday on booktv on c-span2. and sunday at 5 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. >> we've had these explosionexplosion s of knowledge in madison. but we have not coordinated care, and all these services that we have independent so many cracks that the cracks are as harmful as the diseases that we are treating. and you get to step back and ask, you know, are we hurting people over all? i mean come on a global level what are we doing sometimes? and, of course, now we've got these reports saying 30% of everything we do may not be necessary. step back, 30% of all the medications we prescribe, the test was order, the procedures. this is something i think which is for the first time really being called out as a problem. problem. >> dysfunction and u.s. health care industry. dr. marty makary on what hospitals won't tell you. his latest is an accountable. >> senate finance committee chair max baucus left capitol hill earlier this week to give his thoughts on what's called the fiscal cliff and negotiations that are currently und
for us. in the spring we experienced late freezes in michigan and new york and pennsylvania that wiped out fruit crops. a lot of small family farms, farms in northern michigan wiped out. in my home state late freezes in the spring caused cherry producers to lose practically their entire crop right off the bat. it warmed up, the buds came out, then they had a deep freeze; killed everything. our growers produce 75% of the u.s. supply of cherries. that's around 270 million pounds. and the cherry producers experienced 98% loss. now in our amendment, in the disaster bill and in the farm bill, we give them some help because they spent the rest of the crop year this year having to pay to maintain the orchards and the frees, eating the costs and hoping the trees will bounce back next year and produce a crop. so they have all the costs of maintaining everything but no revenue coming in. cherry producers were also forced to fight spreading diseases like cherry leaf spot and bacterial tinker, making the trees even more costly to maintain and at risk of loss. they didn't just lose their crop this
, is not on the news every night and cnn is not broadcasting from the shores of new york and new jersey -- that happened for a few days and then we've gone on to other pressing issues of the day. and as new challenges arise, the press attention will be diverted, as is natural. the problem is it may be natural but it's not necessarily good for people that have lost their homes, lost their businesses and without quick action from congress and robust, definitive, comprehensive support from the federal government, these individuals, these communities will not be able to recover. and i am living testimony as a senator from one of the state's hardest hit in recent memory from a natural disaster to really to be able to testify as almost an eyewitness -- as an eyewitness of what happened in the aftermath of hurricanes katrina and what is possible in this recovery for hurricane sandy. it's been over seven weeks since hurricane sandy claimed the lives of more than 130 americans, destroying -- and i want to correct the record -- 340,000 homes and 200,000 businesses. just to put that in comparison,
to helping new jersey and certainly new york as well and the region, recovered. because you know, when we had hurricane katrina in the gulf coast in mississippi and alabama and louisiana, i was there. when we had tornadoes in joplin missouri, i was there. when we had flooding along the mississippi, i was there. when we had crop destruction in the midwest, i have been there because i believe this is the united states of america. and so i fully expect that now that for the first time we have a type of devastation that other should understand and we are going to have to type a response that others have to see. so i would like to get a sense of view as the type of commitment this administration has. >> senator, thank you for the eloquent remarks about this. as you know, this is a region i too have roots in. to use your term, i married up, i married a jersey girl and work in new jersey and new york and besides the personal commitment i feel, i have also seen a president who was on the ground, in new jersey and almost immediately has done everything he can to help in the short term and has given me
officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: madam president, we saw what happened here, the minority leader filibustering his own bill. he should have trusted his first instincts. imagine if we would have passed the minority leader's resolution. the markets would have been jubilant. stocks would have gone up. one of the great specters hanging over our economy that we wouldn't raise the debt ceiling would have greatly mitigated in terms of damage and danger, and we could move on to the real issues of dealing with the fiscal cliff and dealing with our debt situation and not have a debt ceiling hanging out there as a diversionary but dangerous issue. but for some reason, inexplicable, the minority leader, the republican leader, changed his mind. now, he said on the floor well, important measures deserve 60 votes, but when he brought it up earlier, he acted as if he was in favor of it, he was offering it. and now, of course, essaying no, he's going to object to his own resolution. i wish he would reconsider. again, playing -- using the debt ceiling as leverage, using the debt ceiling as
somebody that's about to set off a nuclear bomb in the middle of new york city or something like that, you know, in order to be compelling. well, you know, the argument is that if you use racial discrimination in college admissions, um, it's likely that there will be somewhat more of unrehearsed, interracial conversations among students and that the african-american kids and the latino kids, you know, who get these preferences are going to say something to the white kids and the asian kids that is, just has overwhelming, compelling educational benefits for them. that's it. s it is a what -- that is what the university of texas is arguing. that is the exception to the principle of nondiscrimination that the supreme court has recognized. okay? now, i think that's ridiculous. and, indeed, you know, the reason the court, you know, buys this is because there are social scientists out there who say, no, it's true, it's true. it really happened. now, increasingly these educational benefits -- which, you know, make only marginal improvements to education, you know, at best, are disputed. you know,
piece in "the new york times" i think at the beginning of last week for the week before about the next genocide being against allowites, and that fear is present among the community members and so what you are talking about is just an extension of that and the way around it is the political solution the longer the violence goes on, the more extremist groups benefit and based on what we have seen of no sort of parent organization, al qaeda and iraqi will not be merciful at all so it is incumbent on us to bolster what in the political opposition which is what we are trying to do. >> thank you, ambassador woo-hoo when you say the regime is numbered is that proverbial or do you mean days? and more broad, as you pointed out at the outset, the then studied peacefully but later on we saw international forces get involved and the europeans and the gulf arabs what mechanisms do you foresee for the future of serious of the interest of the syrian people do not get overwhelmed by the interest of these outside forces. the direction of the events on the ground, the direction is very clear when the d
new york. but it's because of the kindness and the intervention of his roommates, art garfunkel and others who volunteered who dedicated countless hours to reading to him, to allowing him to finish his class work and to be successful in completing his studies at columbia and go on to harvard law school and then to oxford and then to go further and further. he's lived his entire adult life and achieved a career most of us can only dream of while also plunged in darkness. his exceptional courage and perseverance don't end there. today he wants to serve others and catalyze a transformative shift by ending blindness. is this outrageous? is this audacious? maybe. but that's what experts said when president kennedy stood before this congress -- when president kennedy, in the same year, 1961, that sandy lost his sight stood before this congress and challenged our nation to put a man on the moon by the end of that decade. the best and brightest minds, top scientists and researchers of president kennedy's generation rose to that challenge and achieved his impossible dream. now for this g
about middle class americans extended the tax cuts so they don't get hurt. "the new york times" editorial today on how the gop proposal says raising the medicare eligibility hurts working-class americans unable to work to 67. it's likely to increase health care costs. >> guest: with all respect in "the new york times" they are somewhat critical of republicans. they don't see the world the way that we do and that's fair enough. but having said that, look this is a good-faith effort, and the 67 figured that's something the president raised before and talked about in terms of his sight. so let's recognize the demographic reality. we have a lot longer than we used to live. >> host: you're talking abut raising the eligibility age from 65 to 67. that is an idea. >> guest: i probably would. it's in the context with what else we have out there. we've done that with social security. we give people a lot of time it's not like we do it tomorrow with anybody close. but again, we change the social security system it's not a surprise to me i want to get a check at 65 the way my dad did but i
. election officials in new york and new jersey, just can't imagine the level of stress and how much hard work they had to go through. and i applaud them for the heroic effort they did to even put any kind of an election in place on those days. you have polling locations, websites that have the locations. all of a sudden the week before every single polling place -- how do notify somebody? that goes be on my level of expertise but i think it showed that wasn't issue. i went to the sector estates website and they told me to show by polling place and it was under water. and the sector estates office they're doing a lot of good work in terms of trying to direct people. we're trying to help them. we had to open up to other call centers to take new jersey calls. it was a 128% increase. we did a lot of work with her niece the a system that works in normal time didn't. especially when you emergency changes in polling places. clearly there needs to be better emergencies in prepared as. were have strong by the law but both states, almost every voter -- you have an excuse to vote absentee. there's
are not allowed and individuals reside in states with high income tax. >> host: talking about new york, california -- >> guest: new york, california, d.c. however, is your previous guest of knowledge, if you do not enact the patch, a family of four, married couple with two children would begin to face the amt income levels as low as $70,000. it's been described as a blue state problem because of its impact on the estate tax deduction. it becomes every state problem becomes an additional tax. >> host: while we are talking here, if you wonder whether or not you follow in the amt and whether it impacts you, if you go to tax policy center.org, they have a calculator that would hope you plug in the numbers and figure out whether he would apply to you to do anything. we hear from joe first. republican caller, go ahead. >> host: yeah, on the alternative minimum tax, we didn't hear this discussed at all in this last election cycle and to me, we just heard about the very rich to get their income through stock, you know, paying only 15%. it seems to me it will affect them and they will affect the higher rat
. president, this is commonsense legislation. it should pass without delay. in fact, "the new york times" recently ran an editorial on this bill and it said -- "in more than a decade of combat overseas, the military and the v.a. have continually had to adjust to the challenges of new traumas with new treatments, as with the epidemic of brain injuries and post-traumatic stress. adapting the v.a. health system to better meet reproductive health needs should be part of that response. it is one compassionate way to fulfill the country's duty to our wounded veterans." end quote. they also noted that even in this congress, they should be capable of a bipartisan agreement to pass it, and i couldn't agree more, and i can't think of any reason why any republican or democrat won't join us today in getting this bill passed. this is about giving veterans who have sacrificed absolutely everything, every option we have to help them fulfill a dream of simply starting a family. it says we're not turning our back on the catastrophic reproductive wounds that have become a signature of these wars. it says
a microphone microphone appear, please? >> just one fast comment. in new york we passed a law saying legislators passed a budget and legislators in enough money. [laughter] for that became a problem. seriously, it's true. my question is as follows. the fad has an enormous amount of financial asset. if they would've let interest rates go up, the decline which in and of itself, of an even more shocking impact on our economy. is that not true? how do we ever get out if the fed is continuing to buy these financial asset that the quantity they are doing now? how do we ever get out of that mass? santan, i agree with everything you've all said that she didn't disagree about the problem. to me with that of the way our politics is financed because the final analysis, the earnings really have such an amount of leverage of this process and they are the ones that are not compromising and they are driving in addition to the lack of strong political leadership, they are the ones driving an extension of the stalemate. >> i will answer your first question on the fed. the fed holds short-term, some l
come from a state that recognizes same-sex marriage, like massachusetts, like new york, know what the state has to recognize that marriage. and it won't be recognized by any federal purposes, for example, social security. there has been a challenge to the constitutionality of that at -- that act. the court of appeals upheld it unconstitutional. the review has been filed in the supreme court. we haven't acted on it yet but it would be extraordinary for the court to act, to consider the constitutionality of a law passed by congress that a lower court had held unconstitutional. so i think it's most likely that we will have that issue before the court, toward the end of the current term. and then the person who asked the question will -- [inaudible] have the answer. >> another question comes from the auditorium. the lilly ledbetter case, one where you wrote a very emotionally charged dissent, that you, as i recall, read from the branch a game binge -- read from the bench, which is a rare act. and you reflect on that and also how it felt to have literally your request in the dissent, t
at one building on park avenue in new york and he was able to do it because they happened to have the statistics that isolate that one building. do you know what he found? that the average income in that building was $1,167,000 for the year. $1,167,000. the average tax rate of the people in that building was 14.7%. the janitor in that building had an income of $33,000 and he paid a tax rate of 24.9%. is this fair? is it fair that people making $1.1 million paid a tax rate of 14.7% and the janitor who served them, earning $33,000 a year, paid a tax rate of 24.9%? well, i personally don't think so. and i know all the arguments. i've served on the finance committee. i've heard it all. the biggest reason for this differential, by the way, is not the earned income tax rate, which has had almost all of the attention in this national discussion. almost all of the attention has been on the earned income tax rate and raising it from 35% to 39.6%. almost no attention has been paid to the unearned income tax rate on capital gains and dividends. the unearned rate is currently 15%. that's what
it was reported in "the new york times" in 2005. and in response after years of back and forth contentious debate, congress passed the fisa amendments act, the bill that we are considering on this floor today. we're considering a reauthorization. this law gave the government new surveillance authorities, but it also included a sunset provision to ensure that congress examines where the law is working and the way it was intended. now, the debate we're having right now on this floor is that reexamination. i will just note that i think it's unfortunate that we're doing this at the last second. we have known that this intelligence law is going to expire for years. it was laid out for a multiyear span. and certainly, it is irresponsible for this chamber to be debating this bill under a falsely created pressure that it needs to be done without any amendments in order to match the bill from the house. that is a way of expressing debate on critical issues here in america. if you care about the fourth amendment, if you care about privacy, you should be arguing that we should either create a very short-ter
the idea of get steam rolled by high-population states. for example, california and new york or illinois. but that's exactly what these senate rules changes would allow. this isn't just some wild supposition on my part. the majority leader himself said the filibuster -- and i'm quoting here -- "is a unique privilege that serves to aid small states from being trampled by the desires of larger states." he went on to say -- and i'm quoting again -- "it's one of the most sacred rules of the senate." of course that was a few years ago, before he proposed to do the very thing that he is now -- that he has criticized. he now appears ready to undermine the most important rule, not by a two-thirds vote as clearly required by senate rule 22, but by a simple majority fiat. this contradicts long-standing practice and disregards the 67-vote threshold that president lyndon baines johnson said -- quote -- "he preserves indisputably the character of the senate." this is the same so-called nuclear option that democrats previously decried as breaking the rules to change the rules. for example, the senior
elegant, perhaps some president would be inclined to become its permanent resident. >> former new york times photo credit has gathered a few of her favorite white house fellows in the white house, the president's home and photographs of history. one sunday evening and 730 eastern and pacific on american history tv. >> as president obama begins his second term in office but is the most important issue he should consider for 2013? >> if you are in grade 6-12 make a short video. >> the video competition with your chance for a grand prize of $5000. 50,000 in total prices. the deadline is january. for more information go to a student cam. .. >> i think they served as a window on the past to what was going on with american women. >> she becomes the chief con fa daunt the only he could trust. >> a lot of the first ladies were writers. >> they are in many cases quite frankly more interesting as human beings than their husbands if only because they are not first and foremost defined and limited by political ambitions. >> do
of maryland. maryland was hit hard, not as hard as new jersey or new york, and our prayers go out to all the communities that have been affected. but maryland was hit pretty hard. we had sustained winds for hour after hour after hour after hour. we had rainfall records -- nine inches. we had storm surges of seven-feet waves. we had flooding on the eastern shore of maryland. we had a storm in the western part of our state that dumped -- dropped 30 inches of wet snow. so we suffered from the -- the flooding on the eastern shore and the storms in western maryland. many of the communities were people who live below poverty are elderly. senator mikulski was just on the floor and talked about the circumstances in the city of crisfield n. that city. in that city, 32% of the population live blo live below e poverty level. 71% sustained water damage. waterman, which is one of the major industries for that community, found that they were literally unable to work and they're still unclear as to what's going to happen to their crops. so we have a serious problem. give you just two examples of people
jersey or new york, they get to decide. not the appropriators, not the authorizing committee, the cor corps's going to decide. well, i can tell you one organization that has a problem with priorities in this country today is the corps of engineers. and to blanket whatever they say as a priority versus having government oversight and committee oversight and appropriator oversight, by giving this blanket waiver, what we do is we take away our powers to correct them. and all this does is say that it's not automatically authorized and we will have plenty of time. because all these are mitigation projects. they all ought to be authorized and approved by the committee of jurisdiction as they go forward. all they have to do is come to congress and say, give us approval on this. rather than a blanket approval. and i think we're setting a terrible precedent, because what it says is, in the future, then we're going to let the corps decides what is important rather than the -- corps decide what is important rather than the governors, rather than the state legislature or rather than the congress.
was shot and injured in a fire fight. after months of rehas been takers i arrived back home in western new york a disabled veteran. although my friends and family welcomed me home, society did not receive me quite as we will. while there is certainly tension around the politics of the vietnam war, it was the inaccessibility of my environment that made me feel the least welcome. i returned to a country not ready to receive me as a man who now used a wheelchair." that was the reality of an honored soldier who had overcome -- it was the reality that an honored soldier had to overcome until the united states improved its laws to protect the disabled, and it is still a reality in many places overseas, places where our veterans and other disabled citizens will likely travel in the future. either for business or pleasure. we must ratify this treaty because protecting the rights of the disabled is the right thing to do in the united states of america, and it's the right thing to do throughout the world. and let me just again thank senator kerry and senator lugar for their hard work on this treaty,
have raised as a government, will in fact be answered. we also continue to engage actively in new york with aqim and other international partners and preparation for the ongoing u.n. security council discussions on a resolution on military intervention in the north. as plans develop for the military operation, we will be better able to determine how the united states can best support echo watts and the developments in this effort. mali's neighbors have intensified their ongoing efforts to bolster their own security and to address the aqim safe haven in northern mali. algeria, mauritania, carl deeply concerned that any military intervention in northern mali can cause the spill over the extremist into their own countries. these government strongly favor exhausting all political dialogue before any intervention. we ourselves are assisting mauritania this year as well as some eight other states in the region through our counterterrorism partnership program. this program is designed to help build long-term capacity to counter and marginalized organizations, disrupt efforts to train extremis
would happen if a nuclear explosion went off in new york city so everything has to be done to prevent it it's a breeding ground for the terrorists and they do it, and as time goes on, they become more technically capable which in the past has been one of the stumbling blocks when we worked on this in the task force there were not many that could even think about building a nuclear weapon. that unfortunately is changing. >> julia was giving me the death stair which means that our time is up. i want to tell you that after you are working is happening with the hands of such experts please give them a round of applause. [applause] more now on how the budget price of the sequestration could affect the defense spending and national security. from washington journal, this is a little more than an hour. >> we are back. our conversation continues. gordon adams is the white house associate budget director for national security served from 1993 to 1997, and vice president of lexington institute here to give their perspective on sequestration and the impact on the pentagon. let's begin. what affe
/11, 2001 tragedy that hit new york and the pentagon, killing 3,000 americans. that 9/11 wreaked havoc on our economy, and that wasn't predictable. so add all these things up. all told, these and other economic and technical changes accounted for about $3.2 trillion. or as i show in this chart, these faulty assumptions accounted for 27% of the change of the 2001 projections from complus to deficit. by far, the biggest reason for the change from surplus to deficit was an increase in spending. some of this spending was justified. this includes bipartisan support for increased spending to protect our nation against future terrorist attacks, but of course it has become the custom around here. we have spent and spent and spent some more. this spending not only continued but escalated with the election of president obama. his first act was to increase the deficit by $800 billion-plus through a failed stimulus package, and all this increase in spending accounts for nearly 50% of the change from surplus to deficit. that's this part of the pie chart. so how about the tax cuts we hear so much ab
. in other words, the piece -- i think it was in "the new york times" that basically said, this has shown some real promise in terms of protecting areas by having sand barriers off the coast. other experts came in and said, well, yes, 1250eu78 sometimes tt workers and sometimes it doesn't work and you have to be careful where and how you build these. it's not the panacea. it's not the be all and end all of how you prevent this type of damage, but it clearly is something that we ought to look at. clearly something we ought to the examine. but making a decision now in the weeks -- aftermath of the storm -- here we are just days from adjourningment -- and saying, this is why we need $13 billion toward mitigation projects without vetting those projects, without examining those, having experts look at it and tell us what they think would work, houghowmuch it would cost, sette priorities of what ought to be first, what ought to be done and what perhaps might not, and be postponed, all of that requires a process. and if we're he going to be responsible to the taxpayers' dollars at a time of this
new york at one point were working on ways to enable any president, be he or she a roper a republican or, from having to face filibusters on more or less routine nominations. i could support that change, too. but i do want to say, mr. president, as i look at abuse of the filibuster versus use of the filibuster -- and, again, i believe that the rights of the minority must be protected -- you have to look at the bold, stark facts that since harry reid became the leader here, he's had to face 388 filibusters. and the last time the democrats were in the minority, we forced half as many, which i think even is too much. but half as many. so you have our majority leader facing twice as many as democrats led and it just has gotten out of hand. and, you know, you can stand up here and say it's a horrible thing to try and change the rules, but my test is abuse versus use. and i think if we can come together and avert any type of a -- some kind of showdown at ok corral, it's ridiculous. we don't need that. we can talk to each other as friends. we can figure out some of these commonsense reforms
as an example. so let's just understand in this body so that there's no mistake that new york and surrounding areas will get their money because the principle of fema money and probably other disaster money as well is simply this -- at the beginning of a year, you have some money in fema, but you never know what the disasters are going to be throughout the next 12 months. but when a disaster is declared, there is money there to flow, and when that disaster money runs out, as far as i know, it's always been replaced. whether you have an earthquake in california or you have a hurricane in the gulf of mexico or you have drought in the midwest like we have or texas like we have or you have tornadoes like we have in the midwest, and sandy as the most recent example. as far as i know, there has never been any dispute under the laws at that time, and those laws don't change very often. they -- they do get the money out to the people that need it, and then when that fund goes dry, it is replenished by congress. now, unless somebody is seeking money other -- in some way other than other disasters that
. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. and first i want to say i appreciate the true concern that my colleague from indiana and those who have put this amendment together have shown. you're not just giving us the back of yew hand and saying you don't need it or wait three months or what. -- or whatever. unfortunately, though, it would just stop dead in its tracks the recovery effort so desperately needed. you cannot plan a recovery on a three-month basis. the bottom line is, if you want to build a tunnel, you can't say i'll build a fifth now and we'll see if there's more money later. if you need to build a berm of six feed feet, you sant say we'll build six feet and build more later. and because we all know that fema and these other agency work, you have to spend the money first and then they reimburse you, if they are real estate not sure there's going to be the money at the end of the road no more after march 31, maybe congress will or won't, you are a going to get a lot of homeowners, small business and governments not
listening to my colleague from new york. on average over the last 25 years the average participation rate was 35%, 65%. no exceptions. for future mitigation risks were made during katrina. it was not 100%. it was not 90%. all this does is restore it back to what we had traditionally. and what we know is that projects that shouldn't get funded won't get funded when we have this kind of ratio. i reserve the balance of my time. the presiding officer: who yields time in opposition? mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. this amendment, if passed, would not allow the sandy states or future states to protect themselves against the future disasters. my colleague draws a very clear line between protecting from the present rebuilding and the future. if a do you know is wiped out in long beach -- if a dune is wiped out in long beach and to rebuild it they think it should be seven feet rather than five feet because five feet wouldn't be good enough, we come to the irrational, i think, conclusion we would pay for the five f
position and yield to the gentleman from new york whose community is suffering and who has done an able job in helping manage this bill. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: first, i want to thank my colleague from pennsylvania. he didn't try to knock out the whole thing, and we appreciate that. having said that, i would just urge any of my colleagues in disaster areas to think very carefully before they vote for this. this will be the first time ever when a disaster isn't declared that we have offset money for it. that will mean that disaster money will be much less ready available in the future. the precedent is an awful one. it is something that goes against 100 years of democrats, republicans, north, east, south and west voting when one area has trouble to send the money without spending months and months and months fighting about whether to cut this or cut that or raise these taxes or do this to offset it. and i would say we had this fight when irene came about, and 19 of our colleagues came to the wisdom that it was a bad idea to offset it, and we didn't. so
Search Results 0 to 47 of about 48 (some duplicates have been removed)